If that is to be believed, then basically if you have a Ducati with Termis and you take it on the road you are breaking the law!?. So when you buy a bike and the dealer fits Termis, registers and taxes it for the road for you then takes your money and waves you off as you pull onto the street they are doing so knowing that the bike they have just sold you is not roadworthy or legal!?.
The e mark on some cans is only valid with the baffle in. My leo Vince can stated this on my triumph. Remove the baffles and then it said you were no longer road legal. Who cares though really?
Well I'm not taking mine off and I'm sure no one else who's reading this will either. Like you say they are legal with the baffles in but become illegal with them out because of the noise. This is why when you get pulled the copper wags one finger at you whilst pointing at the exhaust not because your exhaust is made from uranium and is belching out radiation but because he's been listening to you approaching doing 10000rpm at 150db for the past 10 minutes and that's what is illegal.
An insurance isn't going to turn down you paying them money.....they make money not look to give you piece of mind. You sign a declaration when you take out the insurance and that runs against a set of rules.......cometh the day you want to make a claim for thousands of pounds back, thats the time they point out you haven't complied with what you signed up for and refuse to pay out! Its a win win for them!
Not if the exhaust states "not for road use" or words to that effect as such exhausts are not required to comply with the regs and so are exempt from those regs (the motorcycle silencer ........... regs 1995). Where the dealer would be committing an offence is if the dealer were to supply a motorbike that did not carry the original exhaust as manufactured and instead supplied one that was unmarked. Whether or not the dealer has an obligation to point out a marked can is not road legal and stamped as such is another matter....... In order to pass an mot, a bike's exhaust, if the exhaust has been replaced, must carry the BSAU 193 stamp (or EC directive equivalent). The roads vehicles (construction and use) regs 1989 sets out that in order to be road legal the exhaust must be (a) that with which the vehicle was fitted when it was manufactured; or (b)clearly and indelibly marked with either— (i)the British Standard marking indicating that it has been tested in accordance with the relevant test to BSAU 193 or (ii)a reference to its make and type specified by the manufacturer of the bike. A bike cannot be used on the road if it is fitted with an exhaust system any part of which is marked with the words “NOT FOR ROAD USE” or words to the like effect. As regards insurers never asking if the can is road legal, why would the insurer assume that it isn't? The obligation is on the policy holder to declare such matters. Check your policy. It'll almost certainly include a condition that the bike is to be maintained in a roadworthy condition and all legal regulations relating to the bike and its ownership &c must be adhered to. In respect of claiming the can isn't marked and is legal, - see above. Nearly 10 years ago I had a bike nicked, crashed and recovered. The prick or pricks who nicked it could barely get to the end of the street on it. It had a full akrapovic race system fitted from new that had been declared. Few questions were asked and so I did not elaborate. The insurance refused to pay out for the write-off on the basis that: 1. The bike wasn't road legal - which didn't really stack up as it wasn't being ridden when it was nicked from my garage. 2. The Exhaust made it more desirable to the hoodlums who nicked and then crashed it - which didn't really stack up because I'd declared it. The matter was disputed and referred to the Financial Ombudsman. The insurer conceded prior to the FO's decision but the months that passed prior to that point were a complete pain in the arse. Should anyone wish to declare a "not for road use" exhaust to their insurer then I would think it prudent to ask the insurer to expressly note that the can is not road legal otherwise any stipulation to keep the bike in a road legal state in respect of the exhaust would subsist. If anyone is bothered enough to look up the regs then do so here: The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 The Motor Cycle Silencer and Exhaust Systems Regulations 1995 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldlwa/40525wa1.pdf The foregoing is a bit rough and ready but that's the general gist of it. Much love.
Yes, quite recently too. I will say however that Ducati Insurance offered me a policy with Termis without too much discussion. Notwithstanding the law, I'd have had those Termis from you a long time ago had it not been for my neighbours. I know the noise they generate isn't much greater (perhaps even less at idle) over the standard however I have neighbours who have complained about my bikes entering / exiting the garage, even in daylight hours. Such past form makes, for me at least, a road legal exhaust a must in the event I receive any further complaints. A road legal bike being used reasonably gives little cause for complaint.
So after having read all the comments it sounds like Ducati insurance will offer a policy that specifies the Termi is not road legal for an 1199, which is good news as then my insurance is sorted. Should you get stopped by the police, what's the penalty for a Non road legal exhaust? All you need is a nobhead copper who knows all 1199 Termis aren't road legal, easy money, is it a fine & points?
When do you ever see a plod on the road to cause you hassle nowadays? I would just buy the bike, ride it and enjoy. Life has enough ifs and buts about it, without worrying about road legal exhausts on your motorbike.
Ffs, I have never known anyone be this concerned about an exhaust. We all fit them and have done for years without any issues. If you are that bothered about a Termi exhaust being on a bike then just buy a standard bike, problem solved.
yes but is that a legal £100? .....should the OP tell the bank it might be hooky?...are the notes marked 'snorting use only'?...so many questions
Piss taking aside it's been an interesting and thought provoking thread. I'll not be taking my Termis off or questioning my insurance company about it for the fear of dropping myself in the shit but I will be reading the small print when I renew my insurance next year and choosing an insurance company accordingly.
I just sent my Insurer a copy of my purchase reciept from Ducati Coventry (insured with Ducati Insurance) as the definitive reply to "is your machine modified in any way?" . There is a significant differance between agreeing with an insurer that they will insure you, and complying with a minor technical difference over the precise volume your exhaust pipe makes... bearing in mind it does not make your vehicle unroadworthy or dangerous. The only issue is the volume of sound, not some arbitrary badging a manufacturer attaches to a product as a 'get-out' clause. If this badge is cloaked by trim in any way, it is effectively immaterial to the arguement since as a non-expert you are therefore incapable of making an informed decision. Instruction manuals also have a disclaimer as to anything declared therein to being either accurate or current... rendering them entirely irrelivant as a source of information. Ride sensibly where the Police might be observing your behaviour, not revving your engine like mad and being a general pillock and you'll never have to worry about the matter. Oh, and get a proper Ducati Agency to perform the MoT test when it's due... seems they understand how to ensure a pass ( probably fit some nice quiet pipes on, just for the test ??? ) .
FFS what a lot of palaver over nothing. And PS stevenson klaatch, decibel readings have no bearing on an MOT whatsoever, as loud as you want and they still pass.
